This week, seven more localities in Virginia voted to become a Second Amendment Sanctuary, bringing the total to more than 30 counties and towns in the state standing in firm opposition to Democrat Governor Ralph Northam’s stated plan to pass stringent gun control laws.
An additional 62 municipalities are considering becoming Second Amendment Sanctuaries, or have votes scheduled soon.
Citizens in Virginia are springing into action in the wake of the recent election which put Democrats in control of the General Assembly with plans to enact sweeping gun bans.
American Military News reports Virginia lawmakers are…considering a state law banning the ownership of certain semi-automatic guns deemed “assault firearms” and limiting the magazine capacity of other firearms in the state — and there are no clauses that would allow existing owners to continue possessing them.
Virginia state Sen. Richard Saslaw introduced SB16, which would expand the definition of an “assault firearm” to cover many different semi-automatic rifles and pistols. The bill would call for the ban of such firearms, barring people from purchasing, possessing, selling or transferring those weapons.
Among the changes in firearm definitions, the bill would expand the term “assault firearm” to include semi-automatic centerfire rifles and pistols with a fixed magazine capacity greater than 10 rounds. The bill would also ban semi-automatic rifles and pistols with detachable magazines that also have folding and telescoping stocks, barrel shrouds, and thumbhole grips and second hand grips.
Virginia is not the first state in the union to declare Second Amendment sanctuaries. Most recently, counties in Wisconsin, Florida, Arizona, and Texas have also stepped forward.
Effington County in Illinois became the first Second Amendment sanctuary last year, after the election of Gov. J.B. Pritzker meant Democrats would be able to push through stringent gun control.
Reason reports, some of the proposed measures included raising the state's minimum age for firearm ownership from 18 to 21 and prohibiting civilian ownership of certain types of weapons and body armor. These measures prompted Effingham County in southern Illinois to pass a resolution declaring all of the Democrats' proposals unconstitutional.
And so the county by county movement began.
Pro-gun states like Alaska, Idaho, Wyoming, and Kansas had already passed state-wide measures declaring they will not comply with any federal gun laws they view as unconstitutional, but the decisions by individual counties to take action are relatively new.
It must be noted that none of the county-level resolutions are legally binding, but they do draw a line in the sand regarding how citizens and law enforcement may decide to deal with stricter gun laws in the future.
Laws are only laws if they are enforced. As we’ve seen with immigration sanctuary cities and state decisions to legalize marijuana despite federal prohibition, state and federal laws cannot be effectively enforced unless cops and local sheriffs make enforcing those laws a priority as well.
We may cheer our fellow citizens’ declaration to not comply with gun control laws. But we also have liberal cities deciding not to comply with Homeland Security or ICE, not to mention simply announcing they will not prosecute minor theft.
Last spring, Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot announced a plan to not prosecute thefts of personal items under $750 that are “stolen out of necessity.”
Yeah, that’s going to work out well.
And last month, San Francisco’s newly elected District Attorney promised he won’t prosecute “quality of life” crimes such as public urination.
It becomes a very slippery slope when communities decide which laws they will and will not abide by or enforce. At every level of government we are seeing the rule of law getting bent – all the way up to attempts to overturn a presidential election. One has to wonder how far laws can be bent before they simply break altogether.
Is anyone else concerned about this?